Experimental Physicist: Is Learning General Relativity Necessary?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around the necessity of taking General Relativity for an Experimental Physicist in their third year of study. The individual expresses concern about peer pressure to choose this course despite feeling uncertain about its relevance to their future career. It is noted that unless one intends to conduct experiments specifically in general relativity, the course may not be essential, as most theoretical work does not involve gravity at that level. The conversation also touches on the mathematical challenges of tensor calculus, which is considered different from typical physics mathematics. Some participants suggest that the conceptual and mathematical skills gained from studying general relativity could be beneficial in broader contexts, such as continuum mechanics. The individual is also weighing their options against courses in JAVA and Physics of the Earth, with a preference for the latter due to its perceived interest and ease. Ultimately, the discussion emphasizes the value of education in broadening intellectual capacity, regardless of immediate applicability.
kratos
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hi, I am in my 3rd year and have General Relativity as one of my options.

I'm kind of feeling the peer pressure of selecting General Relativity, but putting all the hype aside, is it really necessary to learn General Relativity for an Experimental Physicist?

I have to say, maths isn't really one of my strong points, but I hear tensor calculus is quite different to what one is used to in normal physics based maths?

Will tensor calculus do me any good outside General Relativity/research/or even in the workplace?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Unless you intend to do experiments in general relativity there is no need to take it.
Note that this is not restricted to experimentalists. Also in >99% of the theoretical work done, gravity is not handled at all, or at the level of "F = m * g".
 
kratos said:
Hi, I am in my 3rd year and have General Relativity as one of my options.

I'm kind of feeling the peer pressure of selecting General Relativity, but putting all the hype aside, is it really necessary to learn General Relativity for an Experimental Physicist?
<snip>

You didn't say what your other options are, so I can't say if a general relativity course is the best option for you. Education is about broadening your intellect- the mathematical and conceptual underpinnings of general relativity can also be applied to continuum mechanics, for example.
 
Andy Resnick said:
You didn't say what your other options are, so I can't say if a general relativity course is the best option for you. Education is about broadening your intellect- the mathematical and conceptual underpinnings of general relativity can also be applied to continuum mechanics, for example.

Hi, The other options clashing with General Relativity are JAVA and Physics of the Earth.

If I don't choose GR, just wondering which of the two modules would be more worth it in the long term as I'm still undecided in what I want to do after I graduate.
 
Both of the other classes would be easier and physics of the Earth sounds a lot more interesting.
 
kratos said:
Hi, I am in my 3rd year and have General Relativity as one of my options.

I'm kind of feeling the peer pressure of selecting General Relativity, but putting all the hype aside, is it really necessary to learn General Relativity for an Experimental Physicist?

I have to say, maths isn't really one of my strong points, but I hear tensor calculus is quite different to what one is used to in normal physics based maths?

Will tensor calculus do me any good outside General Relativity/research/or even in the workplace?

Thanks

Sure, you obviously won't be directly applying general relativity to most experiments. That being said, taking a class that possesses that level of difficulty will simply make you smarter and broaden your intellecual capacity. Which other classes can you take?
 
I’ve been looking through the curricula of several European theoretical/mathematical physics MSc programs (ETH, Oxford, Cambridge, LMU, ENS Paris, etc), and I’m struck by how little emphasis they place on advanced fundamental courses. Nearly everything seems to be research-adjacent: string theory, quantum field theory, quantum optics, cosmology, soft matter physics, black hole radiation, etc. What I don’t see are the kinds of “second-pass fundamentals” I was hoping for, things like...
TL;DR Summary: I want to do a PhD in applied math but I hate group theory, is this a big problem? Hello, I am a second-year math and physics double major with a minor in data science. I just finished group theory (today actually), and it was my least favorite class in all of university so far. It doesn't interest me, and I am also very bad at it compared to other math courses I have done. The other courses I have done are calculus I-III, ODEs, Linear Algebra, and Prob/Stats. Is it a...
Back
Top